New Missal FAQ’s
What prompted this missal re-translation project?
This project is part of a larger movement within the Church. Pope Benedict XVI and Pope John Paul II before him have expressed their desire to restore greater mystery, transcendence, and reverence to the celebration of the Mass.
The General Instruction on the Roman Missal (GIRM) was revised earlier this decade toward this goal.
Will this involve changing the words of the Mass?
Yes it is true. The implementation date has been set for Ireland and the USA as the 1st Sunday of Advent, 2011. The revision includes all the content of the Roman Missal, but not of the readings.
What is the Roman Missal?
The Roman Missal, called Mass Book for short, includes all the texts (antiphons, prayers for the day, Eucharistic Prayers, blessings, and prayers for the special services of Holy Week) that are needed for Mass. The priest reads from it everything except the homily. The scripture readings have their own book, called the Lectionary.
Why make all these changes now?
Changed texts are a more or less regular event in the history of the Church. When a new liturgical book is published, there is what amounts to a trial period of a few years during which things are tested out and refined. Our new edition will be the third edition of the book.
The first version was published in 1970, exactly 400 years from 1570, the year when the first version of what we call the Missal of Pius V or the Tridentine Missal (named after the council of Trent) was published. And just like the 1570 Missal, there were changes made after it was first issued.
There was an amended version published in 1971, and then a second edition published in 1975, and then the third edition from 2001. That is the edition that is at the base of the new Roman Missal that we will soon see.
Is the new translation going to be much more rigorous?
Yes, in a way. The translation was mandated by a Vatican “instruction,” Liturgiam Authenticam, issued in 2001. It said that,
“the original text, insofar as possible, must be translated integrally and in the most exact manner, without omissions or additions in terms of their content, and without paraphrases or glosses. Any adaptation to the characteristics or the nature of the various vernacular languages is to be sober and discreet.”
But why such strict rules? What is wrong with the translation we already have?
The Office of Divine Worship in Rome prescribed “formal equivalence” as opposed to “dynamic equivalence.” The latter is an attempt to transport the meanings into the vernacular language using the idioms, structures and typical ways of speaking of that language. The present translations use this method. But many felt that a great deal of the original meaning was lost and even contradicted by using this method. Thus the switch from dynamic equivalence to formal equivalence, which attempts to match the Latin grammar, meanings and word order more or less exactly.
Not everyone has agreed with this changeover. For a closely reasoned argument against it, seeTranslating Tradition: a Chant Historian Reads Liturgiam Authenticam by Peter Jeffery (Collegeville: Liturgical Press).
top
This project is part of a larger movement within the Church. Pope Benedict XVI and Pope John Paul II before him have expressed their desire to restore greater mystery, transcendence, and reverence to the celebration of the Mass.
The General Instruction on the Roman Missal (GIRM) was revised earlier this decade toward this goal.
Yes it is true. The implementation date has been set for Ireland and the USA as the 1st Sunday of Advent, 2011. The revision includes all the content of the Roman Missal, but not of the readings.
The Roman Missal, called Mass Book for short, includes all the texts (antiphons, prayers for the day, Eucharistic Prayers, blessings, and prayers for the special services of Holy Week) that are needed for Mass. The priest reads from it everything except the homily. The scripture readings have their own book, called the Lectionary.
Changed texts are a more or less regular event in the history of the Church. When a new liturgical book is published, there is what amounts to a trial period of a few years during which things are tested out and refined. Our new edition will be the third edition of the book.
The first version was published in 1970, exactly 400 years from 1570, the year when the first version of what we call the Missal of Pius V or the Tridentine Missal (named after the council of Trent) was published. And just like the 1570 Missal, there were changes made after it was first issued.
There was an amended version published in 1971, and then a second edition published in 1975, and then the third edition from 2001. That is the edition that is at the base of the new Roman Missal that we will soon see.
Yes, in a way. The translation was mandated by a Vatican “instruction,” Liturgiam Authenticam, issued in 2001. It said that,
“the original text, insofar as possible, must be translated integrally and in the most exact manner, without omissions or additions in terms of their content, and without paraphrases or glosses. Any adaptation to the characteristics or the nature of the various vernacular languages is to be sober and discreet.”
The Office of Divine Worship in Rome prescribed “formal equivalence” as opposed to “dynamic equivalence.” The latter is an attempt to transport the meanings into the vernacular language using the idioms, structures and typical ways of speaking of that language. The present translations use this method. But many felt that a great deal of the original meaning was lost and even contradicted by using this method. Thus the switch from dynamic equivalence to formal equivalence, which attempts to match the Latin grammar, meanings and word order more or less exactly.
Not everyone has agreed with this changeover. For a closely reasoned argument against it, seeTranslating Tradition: a Chant Historian Reads Liturgiam Authenticam by Peter Jeffery (Collegeville: Liturgical Press).